[PC-NCSG] [EC-NCSG] Fwd: NCSG Meeting Request - Helsinki

[Stephanie Perrin]

I certainly agree that we need to discuss how to make the Policy 
COmmittee function better, but since we only have an hour (by the time 
you take off getting food and bathroom break) I think we would need to 
have done quite a bit of prep work on this intractable issue prior to 
the meeting.  We need to analyse what is not working, what systems we 
need, who is on first who is on second, etc. It is fundamentally an 
administrative problem, which we are not supposed to be spending our 
time on during the short meeting format....although I think it is important.

So perhaps we could launch a policy cttee structural discussion at the 
next tele-meeting and get going on this.

Steph


On 2016-05-18 6:51, Edward Morris wrote:
> Hi Tapani,
>
> I believe I did object, perhaps not formally. I think it is ridiculous to use our limited time F2F to talk about the NCSG position on issues when the policy committee, our vehicle for acting upon the issues, is completely dysfunctional. Our public comments are a rarity and generally occur only on mega issues or when 1 individual just decides to do it. Matt had a post earlier where he suggested meeting and trying to resolve many of these structural issues and trying to make progress going forward. It was a good idea then and is a good idea now.
>
> I also support your idea for dropping the mentoring talk, although for a different reason. This is a policy meeting. Mentoring is administrative. That would be best discussed at the A or C meetings.
>
> Nevertheless I realise I may be in the minority in my views. I also have a radical view that lunch is for lunch. Many of us are scheduled from 8 - 18:30 on all four days with few breaks. I, at least, am not a robot. I'm sure there are others in addition to myself who need an occasional break to maintain effectiveness and, yes, prepare for other meetings. I think we should be careful about over scheduling during this first policy meeting. At regular meetings there is a lot of interesting fluff, where you can just go and listen. These four days are mostly substantive where participation is necessary and decisions will be made. Pacing wouldn't be such a bad idea.
>
> Ed
>
>
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>> On 18 May 2016, at 11:35, Tapani Tarvainen <ncsg at tapani.tarvainen.info> wrote:
>>
>> This didn't attract any comments. Deadline is today.
>>
>> I'm going to submit it as is with one exception: I'll drop the
>> Mentoring topic, primarily because I don't feel up to talking
>> about it -- if someone else wants to pick it up, or to add
>> another topic, please let me know ASAP.
>>
>> Tapani
>>
>>> On May 12 17:34, Tapani Tarvainen (ncsg at tapani.tarvainen.info) wrote:
>>>
>>> [copying to both EC and PC]
>>>
>>> As per our call on Tuesday, Stephanie drafted the following
>>> meeting proposal. Comments welcome.
>>>
>>> Tapani
>>>
>>> ----- Forwarded message from Stephanie Perrin <stephanie.perrin at mail.utoronto.ca> -----
>>>
>>> Dear Glen, Thanks for this reminder. We would like to hold an NCSG policy
>>> meeting on Monday during the lunch hour slot. I trust there will be
>>> somewhere in the facility where people can get their lunch and join us, so
>>> the room will be required from 12:00-13:30. Session Title is NCSG Policy
>>> discussion: What are the challenges for this year?
>>>
>>> Overview
>>>
>>> The purpose of this meeting is to have a face to face discussion among NCSG
>>> members, where we can discuss the work we have and anticipate this year, and
>>> discuss common positions and challenges from a policy perspective.  We will
>>> have a reading list of documents that we encourage people to read and think
>>> about prior to the meeting, so that we come prepared to discuss current
>>> issues.  A leader from each of the PDPs or committees will lead the discussion
>>> on each item.  Preliminary topics include:
>>>
>>> * GNSO RDS PDP (David Cake, Stephanie Perrin)
>>> * RPMs Review (Kathy Kleiman)
>>> * Workstream 2 (Robin Gross)
>>> * Mentoring (Tapani Tarvainen)
>>>
>>> Who Should Attend?
>>>
>>> NCSG policy meetings are open to all, and we welcome
>>> new members. Primary audience is NCSG members who wish to participate in
>>> policy formulation. We expect to have at least 30 people there. At the
>>> moment there is only one remote presenter, but there could be others. A
>>> primary goal is to involve other members of NCSG who might not be present
>>> at the face to face meeting, so AV support is important, Adobe connect
>>> preferred.
>>>
>>> ----- End forwarded message -----
>> _______________________________________________
>> PC-NCSG mailing list
>> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
>> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg
>
> _______________________________________________
> PC-NCSG mailing list
> PC-NCSG at ipjustice.org
> http://mailman.ipjustice.org/listinfo/pc-ncsg

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ipjustice.org/pipermail/pc-ncsg/attachments/20160518/a2ed9af8/attachment-0001.html>